If we're going to rewrite bits of the portal, we should consider
moving to pluto 2. IIUC there are a bunch of features in portlet 2
spec that may make our portlets simpler. I also think we should
investigate frameworks such as jsf or even wicket or something because
the current portlet code is ridiculously complicated for what it
does. There must be a more sensible way to write a web app.
thanks
david jencks
On Jul 1, 2009, at 9:41 AM, Joseph Leong wrote:
So unfortunately what happened between Dojo 0.4.3-> Mostly anything
newer especially 1.3.1 is that they had the idea to classify their
libraries to "Dijit" (Widgets) and other subsections. As such, the
porting effort is not small. I believe the debug-views portlets and
such still depend on 0.4.3. At this point in time, my opinion would
be to not try and migrate any 0.4.3 dependent code. There has been
so much change between the dojo versions that it would be probably
simpler and cleaner to just rewrite these portlets. I think it'd be
a good choice to get rid of the old Dojo libraries once and for all
as they add a bit to the geronimo footprint size.. not to mention
there are a lot more features in the latest Dojo release that can
probably accomplish what you wanted to in the older versions.
Thanks,
Joseph Leong
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 12:10 PM, David Jencks
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Jul 1, 2009, at 1:14 AM, Ivan wrote:
I think the one is what need, no samples and testcases are
included. But I found 1.3.1 is released, why not use the newest one ?
Newer would be better if we can get it to work. I set this up a few
days ago and forgot the details... I think that I saw some problem
and wasn't sure what was causing it and tried changing to an earlier
dojo version. I didn't actually have any reason to think the
problem was caused by dojo so very likely the more recent release
should work.
And for the legacy dojo 0.4.3, how shall we handle it ? Like
tomcat, maitaine a our own repo ?
Ideally I think we would migrate our code to up-to-date dojo.
Unfortunately I have no idea how hard that would be. Does anyone?
If we can't, I think there is some release of some 0.4.3 dojo,
perhaps we can investigate using or repackaging it.
There's also dwr.... but I think working on one dependency at a
time will be less confusing.
thanks
david jencks
2009/7/1 David Jencks <[email protected]>
In my attempt to remove our svn repo I found that dojo releases a
dojo-war that looks pretty similar to our repacked dojo war. I can
make the build work with the substitution but I don't know enough
about dojo to know if/what it breaks. Is there anyone who
understands our use of dojo well enough to take a look and see if
this replacement is plausible?
I recall some discussion in the distant past about not including
all of dojo... I'm not sure if this is still a concern, but if the
released dojo-war works and is too big we can use maven to come up
with a smaller war.
See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GERONIMO-4723 for my patch.
thanks
david jencks
--
Ivan
